____ Back to this again finally, with some of the stuff I had meant to post before (but had become lost).
" I still pretty much flatly disagree with many of your points on the 3ph 'type' discussion and it sort of annoys me that you feel you have a perfect grasp of it and refuse to educate yourself further. "
____ First, I never claimed or indicated that I have a perfect grasp on all these 3-phase stator arrangement-types,, rather, only that I understood most of the related stuff well enough to suit my-own needs,
and haven't concluded that I need to learn more about them all, pertaining to our particular intentions concerning the 3-sectioned project that's been being covered within this thread.
" I have no formal training or professional experience in anything even close to alternator theory and a month ago was fairly clueless with the three phase aspects of it but have managed to read a number of easily found papers and articles ... ...
When I try to make sense of your convoluted explanations of such it doesn't seem to follow the same reasoning and leaves me confused as to where/how you came up with it. "
____ If you've found all your source-material on the web.net, I suspect that most of such has naturally accumulated after the www-net came into existence, and so deeper-digging through it is likely called-for,, or else reading (of the subject) within an encyclopedia printed sometime around 1960 (give or take 5-years).
__ It seems that what's been occurring is that you seemingly haven't realized at all that I've been mainly focused in regards more-so related toward the 3-sectioned project-stator,, and also, I-myself hadn't realized that you were stuck solely on just the pure 3-phase aspects so strictly, without inclusion of any corresponding consideration for the single-phase aspects as well.
" I can't imagine you not understanding this stuff with a lot more depth than myself so sometimes I think we must be discussing/arguing about completely different things. "
____ Yes, as is now realized, we were on different tracks but not completely, which is what has led to our extended disharmony.
I'm afraid that I never bothered to further consider that the common-neutral is next to worthless concerning fully-operating '3-phase', and that lack was partially initiated due to your early-on inclusion of the workings of (irrelevant) systems with multiple separate load-systems (which of-course I would not have thought-of as a consideration for our intended purposes).
" It's too bad you can't get to the link I provided,
It's a .pdf file as are most scientific/academic publications, you need Acrobat to read it, do you have that installed? "
____ I reinstalled a much updated version of 'Acrobat' and could then open the link fully.
__ I read it and came to realize that which you must've been referring to, and so have come to realize why you were not in agreement with the points I was trying to convey.
" the center point of a (star, wye, y) configuration is known as (one of either) the neutral, star or zero point and as a 'point' exists whether or not anything is connected to it. "
____ Quite certainly so, however the 'point' is ALSO a 'common' as well, since it's a point where more than just one single-circuit's current-flows through.
" I guess you could twist it to say 'B' is a different 'type' based on how the power coming out of it is then utilized but an alternator with a star configured stator generates power the same way whether 'the point' is used or not. "
____ Yes that's true for THREE-PHASE.
Also, let's keep in mind that it's the manor of connection-type (rather than the alternator itself) that makes the relevant difference (which we've been debating).
And so, (in case you never realized), the "Y-star" is the star-type with only three lead-connections, (and not to be confused with the star-type which has four lead-connections).
I guess it's fairly fair to say that both are the same 'type' -('star' type), whether with or without the common/point being externally used, and then the 'Y-star' would thus be considered as a 'sub-type' (just as would the other with it's 4th-leg).
" What would be the reason for the point to go through the rectifier? "
____ That 'point' obviously of-course may also be considered as a 'common' ,
and so I'm hoping that you can now understand my reasoning for it's actual NEED, for use with the 3-sectioned (single-phase) project-stator. _ Cuz how do you think complete full-wave rectification (of each & every stator-winding) could otherwise be accomplished (without having to pass each-others' current through each-other)?
__ Now that you are aware that the so-called 'neutral' common-type connection evidently must likely have alternate reason for being (other than for the fairly irrelevant multi.load-system type of system), have you not considered it's need for use with old-fashion type mechanical-regulators ?
" How would it be used on a motorcycle system as a 'common'? "
____ Haven't you studied-through the (intended) progression of the three pairs of pic.drawings I've posted ? _ I would expect that anyone able to reason a current-flow's path, would see the obvious need for the common-lead, (in order to allow FULLY unimpeded flow).
I'll be glad to fully explain, if it all hasn't become quite clear to you yet.
" So for most intents and purposes, 'B' and 'y-star' are one and the same. "
____ I guess that's basically-so as far as '3-phase' is concerned.
Seems it would make them the same main-type but still different sub-types.
__ But in the case of single-phase, the plain Y-star would be at a certain disadvantage without the common-lead/connection !
" I have a bunch of three phase bike alternators which are either star or delta and none use a four wire output. I have a bunch of three phase R/R's and none have a four wire input. "
____ I'm sure that they are all quite modern, and are the end-result of the economics of mass-production, thus made as they are not because they work best the way they are, but rather because they are intended to be produced as cheaply as can be acceptable.
" I'm sure there could be other bikes that have used such a four wire system but to what purpose? "
____ With the earlier old-fashion type regulators, two of the windings would be switched-out for whenever the lights are not turned-on, (thus allowing the regulator to better cope, with a more 'balanced' power-vs-load system !), and when they are taken out of circuit, the common-lead is then REQUIRED.
Even-older mechanical-type regulators, would need to make use of the common, as the 2nd & 3rd stator-winding's available power is cut in & out of circuit, as required according to whatever varying power-demand.
" In household type ac electrical use that center point is what's used as the neutral/return when two or three of the available phases are split up and used individually (110v) and is referred to as a 'four wire' system. "
____ Now if you understand that, then it's just as simple to understand what I've meant !
____ The two UPDATEs below were additions to the original/sparse post-wording which had been hastily placed after my originally intended post had gotten lost, and now that the sparse-wording has been replaced with wording similar to that which had been lost, these UPDATEs are no longer actual updates anymore, (thus they're now presented as 'quoted' material).
DCT-Bob wrote:UPDATE ... Okay, I've now used Acrobat to open the that supplied link and have read the part you suggested (and will read the whole thing later), and for now have to let it be known asap that you & I have indeed been at odds because this stuff (so far) seems completely irrelevant concerning our supposed particular-interest. ...
__ Concerning this past exchange.....
wcorey wrote: Apparently the center wire is a neutral and only carries current if there's an imbalance between the three winding sets,
DCT-Bob wrote:____ That doesn't make sense to MY understanding.
... The reason that what you had stated didn't correlate with my own understanding, is because that which you refer to is of an entirely DIFFERENT type of system ! ...
That type of system is not used on motorcycles, as they have only ONE load-system for all-three stator-windings, so thus there's not a SEPARATE load-system for EACH winding (so as to then possibly become "unbalanced" ) !
If this particular example that you've given had also indicated what it's particular intended external load-circuits are to be, then you no-doubt would've realized how irrelevant it is to our intended stator/power-rectification project.
DCT-Bob wrote: New-UPDATE... Okay, I've now read-through (and understood) the whole provided page and believe I now correctly realize the particular point which you must have been meaning to make to me about the lack of significance of the common/neutral for modern standard THREE-PHASE systems. _ And indeed you are right that for a (fully operating) '3-phase' stator-winding alt.stator, the 4th/'neutral' connection makes no required/useful current-pathway.
However, for our intended single-phase 3-sectioned stator-project, that common/neutral is indeed of utmost importance, and it's presents really makes a night & day difference !
Concerning this particular issue between us, wherever I may have ever seemed to be in actual reference strictly to just THREE-PHASE only,, I WAS THEN MISTAKING !
____ As I had begun at the top of my post that was lost, I'm sorry to have caused you to feel the need to respond to such a great degree as you did, and had no expectation for stirring-up such extended concern !
I intended a different purpose, (yet to be gotten to), for stirring-up the sleeping-dogs.
____ I'm inclined to delete my begun-attempt, and try-over again, since our last posts have little meaning for others here.
So I suggest that if no-one raises any objection, we both then delete our last posts on this issue.
... I now think what we've posted is fairly good stuff, and should be kept for future-readers.
Finished-Cheers,
-Bob
For me, often only seeing is believing and even then I still have to stick my finger in it. 
